What gives Mopar starters their sound ?

is that the car in you pic there, pretty sharp, what does it run?

 

I have been in the low 11.40's in the 1/4.Previous owner (a nice guy but a Die Hard Mopar guy to the bone) couldnt get it out of the 11.80's.With the rollbars ,sub connectors ,and steel wheels i added,its at the same weight it was when i got it .Its just distributed better now .My tuning on the suspension ,weight bias ,ignition ,valve train ,and carb went along way on this ****er .Thanks for the compliment on it ...

 

awww damn, just checked out the video, ****er sounds good, looks like running pretty hard too, motor sounds good, sounds like its got more in it too.....

 

First one i have owned .Sorry if i offended you sir ,but i havent had a need to take the starter off .Had my wifes van for 8 years and havent had a need to take the starter off of it either ...

 

I'm just glad Santa doesn't ride a Mopar or we'd all have some emotionally scarred children.

 

I agree with you. The real reason most chevy guys dont like mopars...too complex for them to understand...

 

x2.

 

yah! gear reduction noise! mopar had the very first gear reduction starter and yes it was a ***** to rebuild.

 

Im not a Chevy ,Ford ,or Mopar guy just a car guy .I got past all that narrow minded childishness about the time i started getting facial hair ...

 

Thank you.The Dodge has kinda been put on the back burner since i got my truck in October ,but its been alot of fun the few times i have raced it .Always get a kick out of trying to go faster with tuning .My daughter is gunna be getting her license soon and she will proly be taking over the driving .Its gunna be funny to see people get out drove by a 16 yearold girl ...

 

I'm just glad you still believe in Santa..........

 

i just love that whine that starter makes

 

always loved the sound of my Chargers 440 starter..."yit yit yit..vrooom" we called them Mosquito starters..at least my family did

 

That's a good one.

Merry Christmas

 

Torsion bars - like in my folks 77 Cordoba, the one that when 5 years old went over a RR crossing wrong and broke by being scratched? I'll take GM's compact coil setup anyday.

Spindles:
Ford - usually forged with steering arm one piece, R/L
GM - One main piece, goes either side with bolt on R/L steering arm, later went to one piece like ford in 70's
Mopar - main piece R/L, with R/L steering arm with integrated ball joint? Later went to one piece

Lower control arms:
GM - single triangulated piece
Ford - single piece with track rod
Mopar - multipiece riveted and welded ***y. with track rod

I could go on. Mopar did some things best - but sorry, suspensions were not a**** them...

 

Not biased to one make or the other ,but gotta speak my peace on this. Cant speak for all Mopars ,but the torsion setup on my Dart is almost 50 years old and still OE except for new ball joints and upper A arm bushings.Steers great at 115 mph .As for the rear spring setup ,Mopar was way ahead of their time with the short front half springs and the way they stacked the leafs.Weight transfers like a ***** as well with 1.5 60 foot times on 47 year old OE springs and bushings with no drag shocks and no wheel hop issues ever.Had a souped up 61 Falcon a few years ago that wheel hopped to the point it was a joke.Tried adding leafs ,traction bars ,different pinion angles ,etc.It was a hopeless POS to try to get it to hook and stop hopping with the factory setup.Had a 56 Chevy a few years ago as well.It had new factory springs and bushings in the rear and have never seen a car wheel hop like it.I **** you not that i could be rolling along in 2nd gear and punch it and it would bounce like a basket ball till you let off and it was a turd 350 with proly only 275-300 hp.I tried to ride it out for a block once just to see if it would stop and it didnt.Im hitting the OE suspension setup on the Dodge with 475-500 hp off of a Tbrake and cant make it wheel hop ,so you tell me ?Their suspension setup aint to shabby IMO ...

 

That's rear - I was talking front. 8-3/4" with adj. wheel bearing preload is a nice setup compared to Chevy's* C-clip ********...


* BOP used bolt in axles

 

8.75 is a huge improvement over GM 10 and 12 bolt rears for the reasons you pointed out.Also a better mouse trap than a 9 inch Ford IMO with the less parasitic drag thing the way the ring / pinion gears are positioned in the third member .As far as the front goes on the A bodied Mopars .They were way better than the setup over a Falcon in stock form.Im refering to Falcon frontends .The one in the Falcon is a death trap if you add a heavy V/8 to a stock one.Im speaking from first hand expierence on that one ...

 

I rank Fords in general as a distant number 3 in overall engineering. Chevy rear suspensions and rear axles are **** in stock form, although I have had some first-hand experience with 12-bolts, and was fairly impressed with the amount of abuse they will take, AFTER you add aftermarket axles, pin the axle tubes to the housing, and eliminate the damn c-clips. Did manage to bend the axle tubes and break two ring & pinions though. Chevy has always treated the rear suspension as an afterthought. The 4-link under chevelles and and GM b-bodies was a good idea, but they TOTALLY dropped the ball on the execution, in stock form, the instant center is actually BEHIND the car!! Gotta wonder what the hell they were drinking when they dreamed THAT up!

The small-block Ford has to be about the worst abortion to come out of the big three. Short little crank centerline to deck, so you cant get a decent rod length in there, cast cranks, inconsistent cylinder-wall thickness, ball-stud rockers, garbage heads, and worst of all, broach-cut rods. before some ford guy starts spouting off, I have two, have a project planned around the 289, and my first car was a pinto with a pretty healthy 302. Yes, spot-faced rods were available in ULTRA SCARCE K motors and Boss 302s, but ALL the chevies and Mopars, bread & ****er or otherwise, had proper spot-faced rods. Of all the cost-cutting measures, that one takes the cake. And they did the same thing on the 385 series motors!

 

I will say I am not crazy about the pushrod angle on the small-block Mopars. Even Mopar was far from perfect. Valvespring diameter and installed height is an issue on all the small-blocks so I cant point the finger at Mopar on that count, but it is an issue. Overall Mopar is head and shoulders above GM and Ford on engineering. The BB Mopar distributor/oil pump arrangement is sheer genius. A thing of beauty.

 

*****************************************************

Here is an example of comparing peaches to nectarines. I think most of the guys are referring to the pre-'76, longitudinal torsion bar suspension, and you're looking at a bad experience with one of the transverse t-bar setups.
The longitudinal system's bars had only a twisting force applied to the bar, while the transverse had both twist and leverage applied to them from two directions. (The right side bar crossed over and mounted to the left frame rail, and vise-versa.)
Similar systems, but not quite the same.
As to the break from a scratch, I suggest that might apply to any "spring" with constant force applied to it. The scratch will act as the start of a fracture, and Newton's, (or Murphy's) laws will take over from there.

Just my 2 cents, FWIW.

Roger

 

I am pretty sure the 'doba had longitudinal torsion bars. The Aspen/Volare had those transverse t-bars.

yes, that "scratch" (stress concentration) would do it - just saying it's damn hard to do that to a coil spring...

 

GM has been sued for copying chrysler suspension on their trucks in the past.GM also now uses torsion bar suspension on their suv and trucks.

 

MOPAR = mostly old parts and rust

 

I like Pontiacs from the 60's.

And by the way: Hot Rodding is putting all the best stuff together, isn't it?

 

Here,s one for ya did ya know mopar used a few delco starters I own one, can not get a mopar to fit no how ,also heard that gm like the t/flight so much they used a few in there cars and copy a lot for the t400 back then

 

Mopar starters sound the way they do because mopar designed some funky stuff back in the the old days. They were pioneers on many things, but they usually muffed it somehow. They were early adopters of things like gear reduction starters, alternators, roller bearings, independent suspension, torsion bars, spherical combustion chambers, etc. But they were slow to figure out that some of their designs were not really the best way to do things--keyed axles, transmission parking brakes, ammeters, etc.

I grew up working on mopars as well as chevys, I'm quite familiar with their wonderful designs. I've been keeping my wife's Dart running for 30 years.

 

Yep ,i seem to recall that there was a year or two in the early 60's that Chevy trucks had torsion bars.I saw a big *** Chevy grain truck a little while back that had torsion bars as well.It was like a 2 ton truck.I think it was a 61 Model .Chevy also stole the tail fins off of 56 Plymouths to use on 57 Chevys ,but thats okay cuz Dodge got even and stole the back window opening from a 66-67 Malibu to use on the late 60's Chargers ...

 

You know the funniest thing about it? Someone gives an intellegent answer to the original question, and a bunch of others jump on with smart alec comments to denegrate Mopar. Then when you call them out, you're being an ***. O.K., I get it; more of you drive GM than Mopar. I'm done...

 

In '70 I built a 54 Bel Air with a '65 Plymouth 383 and 4 speed. The gear reduction starter used to turn heads at the local A & W. One guy asked why my starter sounded like that. I told him "Bad sound track dubbing."

He walked away confused.

I nicknamed the car General Mopar